Login | Register
GST Library
TaxReply Support
YouTube Videos
Twitter
Buy Premium Tax Domains
About Us
Contact Us
Our Services
TaxReply India Pvt Ltd

GST Case Laws


TaxReply Citation TAXREPLY
Court
High Court
State
Search by Related Tags
  OR

  OR

  OR
Date (From)
Date (To)
Name of Party
Text Search
Text Search option

  12,969 Results

PAWAN SHARMA vs. SHARMA TRADING COMPANY


(National Anti Profiteering Authority | Sep 7, 2018)

1. This report dated 16.03.2018, has been received from the Applicant No. 2 i.e. Director General of Safeguards (DGSG) now re-designated as Director General Anti-Profiteering (DGAP), under Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods & Services Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017. The brief facts of the present case are that an application dated 22.11.2017 was filed by the Applicant No. 1 before the Standing Committee, constituted under Rule 123 (1) of the above Rules, alleging that the Respondent had not passed...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
Supplementary counter affidavit filed by the learned counsel for the complainant today in the Court is taken on record. Heard Sri Satya Dheer Singh Jadaun, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri B.K.Singh Raghuvanshi, learned counsel for the complainant and Sri Abhinav Prasad, learned A.G.A. for State. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 02 of 2018, under Sections 132(1)(b) of Central Goods and Services...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
The petitioner, a partnership firm, transported certain goods ostensibly from Bombay to Perumbavoor. But when the petitioner tried to unload the goods at Malamury, Perumbavoor, the authorities checked the documents carried along with the goods and found that they did not correctly reflect the destination point. Suspecting tax evasion, the authorities detained the goods and demanded penalty as well as tax. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed WPC No.10256 of 2018 for the release of goods and for th...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
The relief sought for in this Writ Petition is for a mandamus to declare the action of the first respondent, in intercepting vehicle bearing No.AP-03-TE-9508 on 24.08.2018 at 10.30 pm at Madanapalle while it was in transit carrying “fresh tamarind” from the petitioner to its purchasing dealer in Tamilnadu, though it was covered by an invoice and both the parties were registered GST dealers, in detaining the same, and in issuing a confiscation notice, as arbitrary and illegal. ...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

FILCO TRADE CENTRE PVT. LTD. vs. UNION OF INDIA


(Gujarat High Court | Sep 5, 2018)

1. The petitions arise in similar background. For convenience, we may record facts from Special Civil Application No.18433/2017. 2. Petitioner no.1 is a company registered under the Companies Act and would here-in-after be referred to as “the petitioner company”. Petitioner no.2 is the Director of the company. Petitioner company is engaged in trading of specialized industrial bearings of various types. The petitioner also imports certain goods. Under the old regime, i.e. befor...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
The petitioner seeks setting aside of a notice issued in form GST MOV-07 by the respondent no.2. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner has preferred an appeal. The appeal was not registered in the website. Consequently, hardcopy of the appeal was submitted to the respondent no.3. He submits that, the vehicle should be released. Moreover, the confiscation proceeding should be stayed. Learned Additional Solicitor General appears for the res...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
This Court on 19th July 2018 disposed of WP(C) No.13980 of 2018 with the following direction: “In the light of the Division Bench's decision in W.A. No. 1802 of 2017, I dispose of the writ petition, directing the competent authority to complete the adjudication under Section 129 of the CGST Act, within a week from the date of production of a copy of the judgment. I further hold that if the petitioner complies with Rule 140(1) of the Kerala Goods and Service Tax Rules, 2017, the ...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

ASAHI KASEI INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED


(Authority for Advance Ruling, Maharashtra | Sep 5, 2018)

PROCEEDINGS (Under section 98 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017) The present application has been filed under section 97 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [hereinafter referred to as “the CGST Act and MGST Act”] by Asahi Kasei India Private Limited, the applicant, seeking an advance ruling in respect of the following ISSUE. . 1. Whether ...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

G.N. CHEMICALS


(Authority for Advance Ruling, Chhatisgarh | Sep 5, 2018)

Proceedings : The applicant M/s G.N. Chemicals, 27/13, Nehru Nagar-West, Bhilai, (C.G.) GSTIN 22AAFFG5162J1ZJ has filed the application U/s 97 of the Chhattisgarh Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017 requesting advance ruling as regards levy of GST Rate applicable in case of "Neem Seed", classified under HSN Code 1211, placed both under 0% GST Rate and 5% CST Rate, on the condition that "All goods of seed quality" are classifiable under 0% GST Rate, whereas "All go...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

GIRIRAJ RENEWABLES PRIVATE LTD


(Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, Karnataka | Sep 5, 2018)

PROCEEDINGS (Under Section 101 of the CGST Act, 2017 and the KGST Act, 2017) At the outset, we would like to make it clear that the provisions of both the Central Goods and Services Tax Act. 2017 and the Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as CGST Act, 2017 and KGST Act, 2017) are the same except for certain provisions. Therefore, unless a mention is specifically made to such dissimilar provisions, a reference to the CGST Act would also mean a reference...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in


1
May
S
M
T
W
T
F
S